Time out, no possession

[OKREF]

I can understand why the timeout was granted. Wanting to shut down the play before something crazy happened. Not saying it was right by the book, just saying I understand.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by OKREF

I can understand why the timeout was granted. Wanting to shut down the play before something crazy happened. Not saying it was right by the book, just saying I understand.

Forget by the book. It's not right, PERIOD.

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by Rich

Forget by the book. It's not right, PERIOD.

Exactly. No TO should be granted here.

I'm with fiasco about the kicked ball too. If we take the OP at face value, I'm just letting this play out until he does something with his legs that help him gain control of the ball. Simply sitting there with your legs in front of you with the ball between them isn't enough for me for a violation, but YMMV.

[letemplay]

The OP seems to be saying he quickly called a TO before something "ugly" would happen next?? I dunno about most, but if I'm sitting upright and the ball is between my legs, unless someone is holding my arms back, I feel like within a gnats eyelash I'm going to be putting my hands on the ball. Perhaps the player felt the need to use a hand signal for the TO, not sure. I'd like to let the play go just a few more seconds at least...jmtcw

[HawkeyeCubP]

This has been discussed a lot before - with me being on the side of the NCAA rules having this right and the NFHS rules having it wrong because of the case play the NCAA provided for this specific play (removing the ambiguity of the definition of "strike"). Did something change from last year, when this was not a kicked ball per NFHS rules?